What Conservative, Evangelical, and Patriotic Americans Should Know about Donald Trump but Are Afraid to Ask

By Jerry A. Kane

The American public has been made privy to Donald Trump’s life throughout his adult hood. The media focus on Trump has been so pervasive it’s left behind a trail of headlines and feature stories that provides ample evidence he is unfit to be President of the United States. For those conservative, evangelical, and patriotic Americans who want to know the truth about Trump because they care about the survival of this Constitutional Republic, I’ve compiled a rather lengthy list of articles, commentaries, and videos for your perusal.

Although the list is large, it is by no means exhaustive. The news and feature articles are not gossip or rumor-based, Roger-Stone-fed National Enquirer hit pieces; they are based on facts and actual interviews conducted with the mogul himself and are posted online at newspaper and magazine websites.

Most conservative, evangelical, and patriotic Americans are not authoritarians or fascists, but the same could have been said about most conservative, evangelical, and patriotic Germans who lived in 1920s and 1930s Germany. And they ended up supporting Hitler and the Nazi Party because the Nazis promoted a religious, political, and national vision that they found appealing and agreeable.

Trump is a master showman and a marketing guru. Manipulation is what he does, and he sees nothing morally wrong in being dishonest and deceitful to promote himself.

“The final key to the way I promote is bravado. I play to people’s fantasies. … I call it truthful hyperbole. It’s an innocent form of exaggeration — and a very effective form of promotion.”—Donald Trump, The Art of the Deal

Trump followers see him as a political outsider, a larger-than-life messiah and superman standing for truth, justice, and the American dream. They believe he will overturn the tables of the moneychangers to “make America great again” and bring an end to the political corruption and cronyism in government.

The problem is Trump has been (until he decided to run for president last year) a crony capitalist, left-leaning Democrat with New York values who has endorsed and funded corrupt politicians and has used the corrupt political system to amass wealth and build an empire. The truth is Trump doesn’t have any conservative bonafides, and what’s worse he’s a congenital liar. Why any conservative, evangelical, or patriotic American would believe anything he says is mystifying.

Yet Trump has followers who are more than willing to proclaim his propaganda and repeat his lies and allegations with zero evidence any of them are true. His followers parrot his empty slogans and fascist ideas without question or second thought, and they zealously attack his critics as mortal enemies who must be destroyed.

Any conservative, evangelical, or patriot who musters the nerve to tell the truth about Trump is immediately branded a traitor to the cause and marked for verbal abuse on social networking and media sites such as Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube.

Trump has made it dangerous for conservative, evangelical, and tea party Republicans to criticize him. It matters little who they are or what they have actually done over the years to further constitutional principles or the conservative agenda. They must bow and kiss the Donald’s ring or suffer the stones and arrows of personal attacks from the slings and quivers of his followers and paid henchmen. The upshot is Donald Trump’s masquerade as a conservative Republican has succeeded in damn-near destroying the GOP’s conservative base.

For conservative, evangelical, and tea party Republicans to bow and scrape before a man who changes political parties as often as Hugh Heffner does girlfriends would be laughable on it’s face were it not so mystifying and heart wrenching. Why they would promote a man who proudly identifies himself with leftist New York values is nothing short of Churchillian, a riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma. The survival of this Republic rests on the faint hope that these conservative, evangelical, and tea party Republicans are merely ignorant and not willfully so.

“America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves.”—Abraham Lincoln

Trump Admits Contents of Secret NY Times Immigration Tape: Amnesty Is ‘Negotiable’ Conservative critics of Donald Trump have long warned that Trump’s position on the issue is slippery, muddled and vague despite his blunt talk of building a wall and deporting millions. The Stream reported this week on the latest development: the secret, off-the-record portion of Trump’s behind-closed-doors meeting with the editorial board of the pro-amnesty New York Times.

Trump Vows “Forward Motion” On Gay “Equality While speaking with Bay Windows publisher Sue O’Connell Friday, Donald Trump spoke about his wishes to unite the country on gay and lesbian issues and promises “forward motion” on gay rights if elected president.

Kenneth Copeland Lays Hands and Prays Over Donald Trump Paula White set up an invitation-only meeting between Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump and evangelical pastors, and plenty of Pentecostals were there to lay hands on the billionaire, make declarations over his life and pray.

101 Of Trump’s Greatest Lies Donald Trump dubbed Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) Lyin’ Ted when it became clear that Cruz was a serious rival for his nomination; he called Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) an “even bigger liar” than Cruz. He dubbed Dr. Ben Carson a “pathological liar” and said former Florida Governor Jeb Bush’s lies were almost as bad as Cruz’s. Trump has termed virtually every mildly adversarial media member a liar, too. But there’s only one truly massive liar in this race: Donald Trump.

The ‘King of Whoppers’: Donald Trump Trump stands out not only for the sheer number of his factually false claims, but also for his brazen refusals to admit error when proven wrong.

Trump and Drudge Are Lying to You About Colorado Delegates One of the critical differences between the left and the right in this nation is our conception of how Constitutional governance is supposed to work. Our nation was set up with a series of anti-democratic measures designed specifically to prevent the hot temper of the electorate from overwhelming the various protections written into the framework of the government. Not once in the founding documents does the word “democracy” appear — we are a Republic with some democratic institutions.

Shortly after Barack Obama’s controversial Prayer Breakfast remark about the Crusades, the Inquisition, and the terrible deeds people committed in the name of Christ, I stumbled upon a commentary that appeared in the Washington Post, and sent it out with the following comment:

“I never imagined I’d find myself agreeing with Hussein and citing the ComPost, but as they say, politics makes for strange bedfellows.”

My email led to the following exchange between me and a member on my email list.

Response from email member:

I saw this [commentary] before and discarded it as on of the most misleading and biased “analyses” possible while having enough integrity to deceive the masses. I may write the real story and have been considering it but stopped when I heard a number of historians casting this history in a more accurate fashion on recent FOX shows.

For now, two points omitted: (1) Christians didn’t initiate war with the Muslims. It was the Muslims that attacked, defeated and ruled Jerusalem starting in the year 638 granting different rules for Christian and/or Jewish existence depending on the Caliph of each era which culminated in the Crusades being initiated with the goal of freeing Jerusalem after suppression, denial of pilgrimages, and the destruction of Christian symbols including the Church of the Holy Sepulchur, (2) Perhaps my history is bad but I have never heard the KKK viewed as a Christian organization and, even if someone of note has stated such, there is no justification for saying the existence of such was done to honor Christ.

And don’t forget Constantinople, Spain, France, even Rome being attacked by the Muslims prior to the Crusades while the Muslims were threatening the Baltics leading directly into Europe.

I patently reject that the objectives of freeing Jerusalem and protecting Europe while Muslims were conquering much of the civilized world had anything to do with honoring or following the teachings of Christ. To me, it is absolutely absurd. We might as well also say that WWI and WWII were Christian wars as each was initiated by nations that could be readily described as Christian nations.

My Response:

You referred to the WP commentary as “the most misleading and biased “analyses” possible while having enough integrity to deceive the masses.”

Obviously the commentary is biased because the author is defending Obama’s Prayer Breakfast remarks through his analysis. This isn’t a news story, [name omitted]; it’s an opinion piece, which means it’s biased. As for your claim that the piece is misleading, I couldn’t disagree more.

You wrote, “Christians didn’t initiate war with the Muslims.” First off it was the Roman Catholic Church i.e., Pope Urban II, that initiated the First Crusade and other subsequent popes who carried on other Crusades.

You’re right to say “the Muslims attacked, defeated and ruled Jerusalem starting in the year 638 granting different rules for Christian and/or Jewish existence depending on the Caliph of each era,” but I take issue with your claim that the act “culminated in the Crusades.”

I would argue that the papacy’s reason for initiating and carrying on the crusades for over 200 years was purely political. Keep in mind, this was the Middle Ages during the rise of the Holy Roman Empire, a specific time period sandwiched between the Dark Ages and the Renaissance. It was a time period when the state wielded its power through the papacy, and the papacy wielded its power through the state-a time when emperors picked popes and popes picked emperors.

At the time of Urban II, the papacy was gaining greater wealth and power in the West, and Urban II used freeing Jerusalem, the attacks on pilgrimages, the destruction of the Church of the Holy Sepulchur, and the struggles of the Byzantine emperor, Alexios I to appeal to the masses and to justify his war with the Muslims.

Don’t misunderstand my position. I vehemently oppose the satanic jihads of the Muslim religion as much as I do the satanic crusades and subsequent Inquisition of the Roman Catholic religion.

The problem I face is that the term Christian is so loosely defined that it has come to mean any person, group, or organization that self-identifies as Christian and claims to believe in Jesus. Such are the perilous and interesting times in which we live.

If you have time, check out the following links from Historyworld.net.

What I’m saying about the papacy is nothing new and was once understood in this country to be factual.

Response from email member:

I can only tell you what the Durants have reported which is what I used in a non-published book that I have written concerning the 14 centuries of War and Terror imposed by Islamist upon any people or nation that was within reach of their armies which included the conquest of Jerusalem in 638 and the slaughter of Jews, Christians, and many others throughout the history of the past 14 centuries. Nothing, and I mean zero, of the Durant history is incompatible with anything that we have personally observed in recent years. History is repeating itself only this time there are no massive armies with Jannissaries leading the way but rather a more sinister attack using what is called “The Project” created by the Muslim Brotherhood.

The only conclusion that is mine alone is that they have been at war with their so-called non-believers or infidels for 14 centuries and, frankly, I don’t give a damn what Christians or Jews or anyone else does to defend and destroy during a time of war. Much of this is covered in Durant’s Volume 4 with significant detail. Lastly, I personally prefer original work with documentation using sources created during the time of the actual events rather than much of the revisionist stuff published as history today. Islam was the aggressor in 638 and continued as such throughout their history, not the Christians just as Palestine is the aggressor not Israel, and just as the Islamists were the aggressors on 911, not America.

It may already be too late but it will most certainly favor the Islamist goals of world dominance if we continue to excuse them with political correctness and revisionist history.

My Response:

You need to reread what I wrote. I am NOT defending Islam. I’m refusing to give the Roman State Church a pass on her brutal and heinous acts against those she branded as non-believers and heretics. She has been every bit as wicked and despicable an enemy of Christ as Islam has been to those whom it brands as infidels.

Many historians have tried to set the record straight on the Crusades, and they are not revisionists, but mainstream scholars offering what they’ve discovered over several decades of careful, serious scholarship. In fact, Edward Gibbon, author of “The Rise and Fall of the Roman Empire” wrote that “the principle of the crusades was a savage fanaticism [that] “had checked rather than forwarded the maturity of Europe.”

You seem to want to ignore the atrocities the Roman State Church committed throughout the two hundred year history of the Crusades and the six hundred and five years of the Inquisition.

And to make matters worse, you continue to refer to her as Christian. The Pope is not Christian; he’s Catholic. And the Roman State Church is not a Christian church; it is a Catholic Church. That truth does not come from revisionist historians; it comes directly from the men and women who witnessed and chronicled her wickedness and savagery throughout history.

Response from email member:

Sorry, but the Roman Catholic Church is not my enemy nor my country’s enemy, and you are right, I am not to interested in what they did hundreds of years ago and I have no desire to give Barack Hussein Obama a pass for a distorted view of the Crusades.

My Response:

You don’t have to go back hundreds of years ago to see The Roman State Church atrocities. You can find them during WWII in Yugoslavia:

During the Second World War in Yugoslavia, Catholic priests and Muslim clerics were willing accomplices in the genocide of the nations Serbian, Jewish and Roma population. From 1941 until 1945, the Nazi-installed regime of Ante Pavelic in Croatia carried out some of the most horrific crimes of the Holocaust (known as the Porajmos by the Roma), killing over 800,000 Yugoslav citizens – 750,000 Serbs, 60,000 Jews and 26,000 Roma. In these crimes, the Croatian Ustasha and Muslim fundamentalists were openly supported by the Vatican, the Archbishop of Zagreb Cardinal Alojzije Stepinac (1898-1960), and the Palestinian Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Hajj Amin al-Husseini.

Many of the victims of the Pavelic regime in Croatia were killed in the war’s third largest death camp – Jasenovac, where over 200,000 people – mainly Orthodox Serbs met their deaths. Some 240,000 were “rebaptized” into the Catholic faith by fundamentalist Clerics in “the Catholic Kingdom of Croatia” as part of the policy to “kill a third, deport a third, convert a third” of Yugoslavia’s Serbs, Jews and Roma in wartime Bosnia and Croatia

Ante Pavelic was the original “Butcher of the Balkans.” He was the leader of the Nazi puppet government of the “Independent State of Croatia” who died peacefully in Madrid in 1959. The mass murderer of 80,000 Jews, 30,000 Gypsies, and over 500,000 Serbs survived the Second World War and never faced a war crimes tribunal.

Instead Pavelic was offered sanctuary by the Vatican and became a security advisor to Juan and Eva Peron before retiring to fascist Spain. Key to Pavelic’s survival was the so-called Croatian Treasury, really nothing more than Pavelic personal wealth, the plunder of concentration camps and massacres throughout the Balkans and beyond. Wherever the loyal Ustashe (Croatian Nazis) served Pavelic and Hitler, Orthodox Christian churches and Jewish synagogues were plundered and the property of Serbs, Jews, Gypsies, Ukrainians and others were confiscated. The crimes of Pavelic and the Ustashe were so barbaric that even hardened Nazis were disgusted by it.

In the final days of World War II, Pavelic and his inner circle bought and bribed their way to Rome where help was waiting at the Vatican. Pavelic committed genocide on a level far greater than any known before or since in the Balkans but he had been personally received by Pius XII during his reign of terror. The Franciscan Order and Vatican bank eagerly helped launder Pavelic’s loot the proceeds of which were used to establish the so called ratline which helped thousands of Nazis and Ustashe escape to South America.

There it is, [name omitted]. You can either accept the truth or continue to live in denial.

Response from email member:

I believe your apologies for Obama are clearly stated as “Nazi-installed” per Ante Pavelic. You might recall that Italy itself was involved. Let us now blame all Lutherans and Germans for the holocaust!! This is absurd as this has nothing to do with either the Crusades or Obama’s denigration of Christianity and his attempts to destroy Western values. I will take you off of my distribution list as you simply miss the big picture of world events and world history for your own personal reasons.

My Response:

There is none so blind as he who will not see.

Bye, bye [name omitted]

The truth is papal Rome has a bloody history. Its oppression of Jews, non-believers, and heretics has been widespread and consistent throughout history.

The papacy was designed for power and dominion over men; and its purpose hasn’t changed, which is why Lord Acton opposed it so vigorously.

“The papacy contrived murder and massacre on the largest and also on the most cruel and inhuman scale. They were not only wholesale assassins but they made the principle of assassination a law of the Christian Church and a condition of salvation…. [The Papacy] is the fiend skulking behind the Crucifix.”—John Emerich Edward Dalberg, a.k.a. Lord Acton

The conservative Twitterverse is all riled up because at Thursday’s (Feb. 5) National Prayer Breakfast (an event founded and run by the secretive Christian organization known as The Fellowship), President Obama said that Christians, as well as Muslims, have at times committed atrocities. His words:

“Humanity has been grappling with these questions throughout human history. And lest we get on our high horse and think this is unique to some other place, remember that during the Crusades and the Inquisition, people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ. In our home country, slavery and Jim Crow all too often was justified in the name of Christ.”

This would seem to be Religious History 101, but it was nonetheless met with shock and awe.

“Hey, American Christians, Obama just threw you under the bus in order to defend Islam,” wrote shock jock Michael Graham. Rep. Marlin Stutzman, R-Ind., called the comments “dangerously irresponsible.” The Catholic League’s Bill Donohue said: “Obama’s ignorance is astounding and his comparison is pernicious. The Crusades were a defensive Christian reaction against Muslim madmen of the Middle Ages.”

More thoughtfully, Russell Moore, president of the Southern Baptist Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission, called Obama’s comments about Christianity “an unfortunate attempt at a wrongheaded moral comparison. … The evil actions that he mentioned were clearly outside the moral parameters of Christianity itself and were met with overwhelming moral opposition from Christians.”

Really?

1. The Crusades

The Crusades lasted almost 200 years, from 1095 to 1291. The initial spark came from Pope Urban II, who urged Christians to recapture the Holy Land (and especially the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem) from Muslim rule. Like the promise of eternal life given to Muslim martyrs, Crusaders were promised absolution from sin and eternal glory. Militarily, the Crusades were at first successful, capturing Jerusalem in 1099, but eventually a disaster; Jersualem fell in 1187. Successive Crusades set far more modest goals, but eventually failed to achieve even them. The last Crusader-ruled city in the Holy Land, Acre, fell in 1291. Along the way, the Crusaders massacred. To take but one example, the Rhineland Massacres of 1096 are remembered to this day as some of the most horrific examples of anti-Semitic violence prior to the Holocaust. (Why go to the Holy Land to fight nonbelievers, many wondered, when they live right among us?) The Jewish communities of Cologne, Speyer, Worms, and Mainz were decimated. There were more than 5,000 victims. And that was only one example. Tens of thousands of people (both soldiers and civilians) were killed in the conquest of Jerusalem. The Crusaders themselves suffered; historians estimate that only one in 20 survived to even reach the Holy Land. It is estimated that 1.7 million people died in total.

And this is all at a time in which the world population was approximately 300 million — less than 5 percent its current total. Muslim extremists would have to kill 34 million people (Muslim and non-Muslim alike) to equal that death toll today. As horrific as the Islamic State’s brutal reign of terror has been, its death toll is estimated at around 20,000.

The Inquisition

While most of us regard “The Inquisition” as a particular event, it actually refers to a set of institutions within the Roman Catholic Church that operated from the mid-13th century until the 19th century. One actually still survives, now known as the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, which was directed by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger before his 2005 election as Pope Benedict XVI. These institutions were charged with prosecuting heresy — and prosecute they did, executing and torturing thousands of suspected witches, converts from Judaism (many of whom had been forced to convert), Protestants, and all manner of suspected heretics, particularly in the 15th and 16th centuries. Historians estimate that 150,000 people were put on trial by the Inquisition, with 3,000 executed. Arguably, the Islamic State’s methods of execution — including crucifixion, beheading, and, most recently, burning a prisoner alive —are as gruesome as the Inquistion’s, with its infamous hangings and burnings at the stake. ISIS is also committing systematic rape, which the Inquisition did not, and enslaving children. As for torture, however, it’s hard to do worse than the Inquisition, which used torture as a method of extracting confessions. Methods included starvation, burning victims’ bodies with hot coals, forced overconsumption of water, hanging by straps, thumbscrews, metal pincers, and of course, the rack. Believe it or not, all of this was meant to be for the victim’s own good: better to confess heresy in this life, even under duress, than to be punished for it in the next. Contrary to Moore’s statement, the Inquisition was not “outside the moral parameters of Christianity itself and … met with overwhelming moral opposition from Christians.” Though Moore may distinguish between ‘Christianity’ and the Roman Catholic Church, for all intents and purposes the Roman Catholic Church WAS Christianity at the time, or at least claimed to be.

Slavery and Jim Crow

“Slaves, obey your masters,” the New Testament says — three times. And indeed, Christian teaching was cited on both sides of the slavery debate, with both slaveholders and abolitionists using it to justify theiractions. Segregationists also looked to the “Curse of Ham,” from the story of Noah, and the notion that God had separated the races on different continents. The effects were world-historic in scope: Nearly 12 million people were forced on the “Middle Passage” from Africa to the Americas. More recently, though the vast majority of Christians abhor it, the Ku Klux Klan, to the present day, still insists that it is a “Christian organization.” There’s a reason the Klan burned crosses alongside its lynchings and acts of arson, after all. Of course, there was also organized Christian opposition to slavery and to Jim Crow, and Christianity is at least as much the property of the Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr., as of the segregationists and slaveholders of the Old South. But this was precisely Obama’s point: All religions have their hateful extremists, and their prophets of justice. What about popularity? Do more Muslims support the Islamic State today than Christians supported Jim Crow in the past? No. At the height of the KKK’s popularity in the 1920s, approximately 15 percent of white male Americans were members. That number is eerily similar to the 12 percent of Muslims worldwide who support terrorism today.

In other words, not only is Obama factually correct that Christian extremism across history has been at least as bloody as Muslim extremism today, it is also factually true that such extremisms have been equally popular. True, as Rush Limbaugh points out, the Crusades were “a thousand years ago,” the Inquisition ended 200 years ago, and Jim Crow legally ended in the 1960s. But the president specifically noted that “humanity has been grappling with these questions throughout human history.”

Which is the real point. There are two narratives about radical Islamists, and indeed about enemies of any sort, that coexist in American culture. According to one, they are different from us — Muslims, Palestinians, Israelis, Communists, you name it. Thus, in the battle against Islamic extremism, Islam is, in part at least, the enemy.

The other narrative is that all peoples, all creeds, all nations contain elements of moderation and extremism. Thankfully, racist Christian extremists are today a tiny minority within American Christianity. But only 100 years ago, they were as popular among American Christians as the Islamic State is among Muslims today. Thus, in the battle against Islamic extremism, it is extremism that is the enemy.

Hysterical commentary notwithstanding, no one is suggesting that Christians are just like the Islamic State. But Obama did suggest that Christianity is like Islam; both faiths have the capacity to be exploited by extremists. Christians should not be insulted by the facts of history. Rather, all of us should be inspired by them to recognize the dangers of extremism — wherever they lie.

The following speech was delivered at “Freedom Celebration for We the People” Tea Party Rally Saturday on the steps of the Indiana County Court House in Indiana, Pennsylvania October 2, 2010.

The Democrats Must Go This November

By Jerry A. Kane

How yuns doin’? Living in the belly of the beast and in the People’s Republic of Maryland for the past twelve years makes me long for Western Pennsylvania and use that plural pronoun again.

I.M. Kane, I write social and political commentaries and report goings-on at my blog, The Millstone Diaries. I’m married with three kids in their thirties, three grandchildren, and one wife who thinks I make George Costanza an appealing catch and Cosmo Kramer a towering intellect. So there’s really only one reason why you should pay any mind to what I have to say here today, and that is it’s the truth.

Now that I’ve dispensed with the pleasantries, let me say upfront that I’m not a motivational speaker, nor am I here to ingratiate myself to any political party or even to the tea party movement for that matter. Think of me as someone back from a reconnaissance mission with information that describes the situation at hand. Therefore, if you find what I say offensive, remember to keep the message separate from the messenger. That is, don’t shoot me, I’m only the piano player, not the piper who makes mice dance.

In 1933, Winston Churchill tried in vain to alert his countrymen to the dangers of the charismatic corporal and the Nazi Party that had come to power demanding German “living space” from neighboring countries. Adolf Hitler and the Nazis built super highways and affordable cars for the common man and won the affection of many Germans. But at the same time, he was building munitions factories, tanks, ships, submarines, and airplanes in preparation for war.

Churchill repeatedly warned his government and the British people to prepare for war against the rising tyranny, but he was derided by Parliament and mocked by the media. The majority of the British people were weary from fighting the First World War and worn out from striving to survive the Great Depression of 1929, so they denied the truth about what Hitler and the Nazis were planning and refused to confront the approaching tyranny.

Today, a majority of Americans are weary from the war on terrorism, worn out from the worst recession since the Great Depression, and live in denial much like the Brits of the early 1930s. A majority of Americans reject the truth about Barack Obama and the Democrat Party and refuse to confront the approaching tyranny.

You heard it right. I am comparing the current situation in the United States to Germany in the early 1930s and Barack Obama and the Democrat Party to Adolf Hitler and the Nazi Party, and for good reason.

Adolf Hitler and the Nazi Party could have been stopped July 31, 1932, in a special election had a majority of Germans read Mein Kampf and comprehended the outline of what he planned to do. But not enough did, and the Nazis won 230 seats and became the largest political party in the Reichstag.

On the basis of that special election, Hitler demanded to be appointed chancellor in control of the state, and six months later President Hindenburg met his demands. What’s interesting is that the Nazis never captured more than 37 percent of the national vote or gained a majority of seats in the Reichstag. However, with Hitler in the chancellery they were able to consolidate power and take control of the government with relative ease.

Hitler and the Nazi Party were driven to change Germany and that change brought down the republic and established a fascist state and dictatorial rule. The Germans instinctively knew that Hitler and the Nazis were bad news; they just didn’t know how bad the news would be.

Obama and the Democrat Party are on a mission to transform America, and that is bad news; yet far too many Americans remain clueless to the significance of that fact. Back in 2008, they heard the word change and turned the nation over to Barack Obama and the Democrat Party to take the country in a different direction from where George W. Bush and the neoconservative, RINO Republicans had been taking it.

They just assumed that Obama and the Democrat Party meant to change the direction of the country; they didn’t stop to think about the parsing of “is” during the Clinton years or Ronald Reagan’s signature phrase—trust, but verify.

Now they know that change didn’t mean direction; it meant speed. Obama and the Democrat Party haven’t changed the direction of the country; it’s still on the road to ruin. Only the arrival time has changed and the throttle shifted from impulse power to warp drive. But not to worry, dutiful Democrats have promised to manage the nation’s decline every step of the way.

So let’s rummage through Obama and the Democrats’ management handiwork over the past 18 months:

They managed to push through the largest spending bill in history, an unread $787 billion porkulus package purported to jump-start the economy and create jobs; however, it served only to jack up the national debt 23 percent to $13 trillion. The bill failed badly, but that hasn’t stopped them from boasting that the stimulus “saved or created” 3 million jobs even though economics offers no quantifiable way to calculate the number of “saved jobs.”

They managed to nationalized General Motors and the student loan industry, and meddled in the closings of thousands of General Motors and Chrysler dealerships.

They managed to transform the American health care system in a way that harms taxpayers, health care providers, and quality patient care, and administer a stranglehold over the health care industry, forcing every American to buy health insurance.

They managed to increase government control over tobacco and food, and under the pretense of fairness have been ruthless in their efforts to regulate political speech over talk radio and the Internet.

They managed to seize TARP funds meant to bailout the banking system and redirected them to Congresswoman Maxine Waters’ husband’s bank that didn’t qualify, the cash-for-clunkers program, teacher unions, union supporters, and blue states that supported Obama.

They managed to increase federal control over finance and mortgages causing housing prices to plummet wiping out equity and making it harder for people to move and take a job in a different city or state

They managed to place a moratorium on off-shore drilling that is destroying the oil industry in the Gulf of Mexico and wreaking havoc on the region’s economy.

They managed to foster an environment where more Americans are now working for the government or are on food stamps than ever before.

They managed to quadruple the deficit and spend the nation to the brink of bankruptcy.

They managed to have Justice Department officials sue the state of Arizona for passing an immigration law that mirrors the federal immigration law, and turn over the sovereign state of Arizona to the United Nations for prosecution of potential human rights abuses.

They managed to allow Justice Department officials to dismiss an open-and-shut voter intimidation case against members of the New Black Panther Party and to adopt a no-prosecution policy for blacks who violate the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

In 18 short months, the policies implemented by Barack Obama’s Bread and Circuses Salvation Sideshow Administration and the legislation passed by the Democrat-controlled Congress have made the current Democrat Party the greatest enemy of economic liberty and personal freedom in American history, and this is why the Democrats must go this November.

Now I realize that the Tea Party movement prides itself on being nonpartisan, but neutrality in this environment is a heinous word. Obama and the Democrat Party will not stop their relentless pursuit of power. You can write letters, sign petitions, and rally in DC til the cows come home, but the combined efforts of your angry protestations will never persuade them to abandon their radical agenda to transform America. The truth is the Democrat Party is controlled by leftist ideologues and led by true believers.

Our country’s future is imperiled because too many patriots in the Tea Party movement refuse to draw a clear distinction between the two parties and blame both parties equally for the problems America faces.

Granted, the Republican Party’s neo-conservative/RINO wing deserves some blame, but the Party does have a conservative-leaning, libertarian-minded grass roots base; whereas the Democrat Party doesn’t have a conservative/libertarian wing and its Astroturf base consists of labor unions and leftist-leaning, statist-minded special interest groups.

In other words, the Democrats act like gangsters, and the Republicans like bad cops on the take. So the question before you this November is which of the two parties can be reformed?

George Soros and the leftist elite have invested too much time and money and are too close to transforming the U.S. into a fascist state under a socialist dictator to allow grass-root commoners from the Tea Party movement to gain control of their Party. Besides, real reform needs a party base to support and carry it out, and there’s no chance of that happening as long as iron-fisted union and special interest thugocracies rule the base. Like it not, the answer is the Republican Party by default.

The 2010 midterm election is as vital for the survival of our Republic as the 1932 special election was to Germany’s. Had the German people put aside their differences and united to defeat the Nazis in that election, the world would never have known one of its worst mass murderers and the Nazi Party would have faded into the shadows.

Churchill called World War II the unnecessary war because he believed it could have been prevented had the European democracies not backed down from the tyrant. When Hitler threatened to seize Czechoslovakia in September 1938, he told General Keitel that he would not enter the country unless he was convinced that France and England would not intervene.

The French and English forces were vastly superior and outnumbered those of Germany at the time. Hitler was the typical tyrant. He preyed on weakness and respected superior force. Had the French and English people not been led by weak and fearful leaders willing to appease Hitler, he would have backed down. But instead they fed the crocodile hoping they would be the last to be eaten.

World War II is the greatest tragedy of the modern era for it could have been averted if the German people had voted against the Nazis in that ’32 election or the British had heeded Churchill’s warning about the rising threat in ’33.

However, a worst catastrophe awaits us if we fail to learn the lessons from that election and Churchill’s warning. I submit that you are here today because you sense that the upcoming November election is not politics as usual, that something terrible is about to happen to our country if we don’t prevent it.

You have such a sense of urgency and foreboding that you can almost feel the enveloping inhuman repression crushing you. You sense that the dreams from Obama’s father are really nightmares for America. Inwardly you’re screaming, “Stop the madness … the Chicago-style politics … the overreaching regulations … the overbearing nanny state.”

You approach the media for redress of your grievances, and they report that you are too stupid, too uninformed, and too uneducated to understand the nuances involved in all that Barack Obama and the Democrat Party are doing to transform America.

The truth is the American media have been reduced to a gaggle of crippled weaklings controlled by fear serving up Democrat talking points and Party propaganda. They won’t recognize wickedness and immorality unless it’s to denounce those who do. You trust them at your own peril.

So the battle lines have been drawn. It remains to be seen whether or not the electorate will be fooled with Democrat attack ads, appeals to petty distractions, or cries of independent-mindedness. They are running from Obama, Pelosi, and Reid now, but never forget the cheers of “Yes We Can!” when they passed the stimulus bill, and they yelled it even louder when they passed ObamaCare, and they will scream it at the top of their lungs when they cram cap and trade and immigration reform down our throats if they are not stopped this November.

If Churchill was right in saying that “Democracy is based on reason, a sense of fair play, and freedom and a respect for other people” and “is not some harlot in the street to be picked up by some man with a Tommy gun” then the Democrat party is anything but democratic for it has shown nothing but contempt for democracy.

America is special, a unique country worth saving. It is not just another nation; it embodies the ideal of man’s inalienable rights. If America is to survive, it must undergo a major change in the balance of power. Obama, Pelosi, Reid, and the Democrat Party have plundered this nation’s wealth and destroyed its free market system long enough.

November begins the reckoning, and “we are the guardians of causes so precious to the world, that we must … ‘Lay aside every impediment.'”After all, what is the use of the tea party if it is not to strive to uphold the American ideal for those who will live in these United States after we are gone?

America stands poised at the edge of a precipice; her next step could send her plummeting headlong to an untimely death. Yet, to even suggest such a possibility opens the door to charges of alarmism or hyperbolic fear-mongering. The chattering classes preach that a dictatorship can’t happen here; America will survive even with one-party rule and a radical socialist in the White House. The radio talk-show host, whose persistent pipes of “Let not your heart be troubled,” has done little to allay my fears for what is likely to happen to my country if the Democrats gain a super majority in Congress and Barack Obama wins the presidency.

It seems that conservative and libertarian pundits and commentators have not connected the dots to see the picture that I see, for they would be sounding the alarm and warning Americans of the radicalism that is about to bring down their nation. Then again, perhaps some have captured the image through their rose-colored glasses but are so attached to their celebrity status that they dare not point it out for fear of being ostracized and labeled a “kook” by their more “sensible” colleagues.

Call me a kook and detest me, but name-calling and rejection will not stop this watchman from warning our fence-sitting Americans of what lurks over the horizon. Facts are stubborn things; they are not opinions subject to debate, and for that reason, two plus two always equal four, not five, contrary to the slogans in Stalin’s Soviet Union or the announcements from the Party of Big Brother in George Orwell’s dystopian novel Nineteen Eighty-Four. Orwell’s protagonist, Winston Smith, who works in the media and creates the Party’s deceptive propaganda, doesn’t know for sure if two plus two equal five, as the Party claims, “If both the past and the external world exist only in the mind, and if the mind itself is controllable—what then?”

Here we stand a divided country on the brink of entering a nightmare world, unprecedented in American politics, with an undecided electorate who are unsure for whom they will vote in this election. They see Tweedle Dee, Tweedle Dum, six of one, half-dozen of the other, without a dime’s difference between them. Like Winston Smith, they don’t know if two plus two equal four or two and two make five.

Unlike Smith, our undecideds don’t live in an Orwellian society under a totalitarian government, at least not yet, so why don’t they know a radical socialist when they see one? Perhaps they can’t distinguish a radical socialist from a moderate conservative because they have absorbed so much conflicting information from the media making it impossible to sort out.

Conservative pundits and commentators have made a critical error in judgment by depicting Obama as the most liberal member of the Senate. Obama is anything but liberal; he is a radical socialist ideologue whose worldview and personality traits align him more with the revolutionary demagogues Fidel Castro and Hugo Chavez than they do George McGovern and Jimmy Carter. This is why Castro writes in a column that Obama is “the most progressive candidate for the U.S. presidency.”

Add the word progressive to the word Democrat and you get activists demanding a socialist agenda; i.e., massive income redistribution from corporations and the wealthy to low income workers and the poor; massive reductions in military spending; an increase in social welfare spending; universal healthcare; living wage laws; the right of all workers to organize into labor unions and to engage in strikes and collective bargaining; the abolition of significant portions of the Patriot Act; the legalization of gay marriage; strict campaign finance reform laws; a complete pullout from the war in Iraq; a crackdown on free trade and corporate welfare; and the Freedom of Choice Act, which would cancel every state, federal, and local regulation on abortion, abolish all state restrictions on government funding for abortions, and if Obama is elected, use income taxes to fund abortions.

In other words, you get the issues and causes championed by both the House Progressive Caucus (HPC), which is now the single largest partisan caucus in the United States House of Representatives, and the country’s most radical socialist presidential candidate. HPC, a group made up of the most radical social democrats in Congress, is involved in symbiotic relationship with the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), which is the largest socialist organization in the United States.is the principal affiliate of the Socialist International, which claims to be the successor to Karl Marx’s “First International,” founded in London in 1864.

During his commencement address at Harvard, Solzhenitsyn said, “socialism of any type and shade leads to a total destruction of the human spirit and to a leveling of mankind into death.” Eric Hoffer correctly analyzed that socialist movements attract the misfits who are dissatisfied with themselves and their lives, who blame their own condition on outside forces, and think that a change in the world around them will suddenly transform their identities and magically cure their problems. The people caught up in socialist movements are searching for meaning in their lives; therefore, they often hate the present and passionately seek a perfect tomorrow.

Hoffer understood that America had a vigorous and healthy society because of the quality of its common people. Until recently, most Americans have been comfortable in their own skin and satisfied with their own lives, which explains why they have not been mesmerized by socialist movements such as Nazism, fascism, and communism. But now, far too many Americans are mesmerized by Obama’s words and image, not for what he’s accomplished, but for what they hope he will become.

Never before has a politician had such a captivating effect on so many Americans. Such a grandiose claim “We are the ones we’ve been waiting for” by the charismatic leader of change about himself and the ruling clique of radical socialists in Congress is reason enough to give pause. Mark Levin says his greatest concern is whether the majority of voters will prove “susceptible to the appeal of a charismatic demagogue.”

It’s regrettable when any nation’s people surrender their hearts and minds over to a despot; but when the electorate of the freest people in the greatest nation on earth do it, “[t]his prospect frightens me much more than bombs.” What happened in Germany with Hitler, happened again in Cuba with Castro, and can happen here in the United States with Obama. It was the ordinary people who carried out the leader’s heinous crimes and murders believing in the glorious tomorrow promised them. “Of all tyrannies,” writes C.S. Lewis, “a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive.”

The Germans had enormous war debts and a terrible economy, so they believed the charismatic leader who personified hope and went on to elect the National Socialist Workers Party (Nazis) that promised change. The Cubans also supported a young, charismatic leader who promised change, and they openly embraced his idea without asking what kind of change or knowing the price they would have to pay. The upshot for our undecided electorate to ponder is that freedom is not free and “is never more than one generation away from extinction.”